No no, the best part of PM was the hidden outtake sequence. (see the 3rd paragraph on that page) Some of them are hilarious. Sadly it only lasts for about 2 minutes.
Yes, you can run a lot of these old programs on the nice new shiny P4 2.4GHz. Just better hope nobody put in a nifty assembly language timer loop counting on the 4.77MHz clock speed... It could really screw things up. And if it's used for any kind of real-time control, this is very likely. If they upgraded to anything other than the original specs it would probably require a lot of validation testing or pouring over the old program to make sure this kind of thing isn't an issue.
#1) Point taken. I'm not attempting to claim that Linux has the same reliability or support compared to Sun/Solaris. I wouldn't recommend putting anything mission-critical on Linux vs. Solaris at this point because of it. However, Linux is progressing very rapidly, and I think that the day is coming where Solaris's advantage evaporates.
#2) Point taken but I really don't see the relevance.
#3) Big deal. After you install your apps on Linux, don't screw with adding all manner of useless garbage. If you keep identical hardware (which is really all that Sun is making you do) and intelligently install new software you will not have this problem.
#4) Who wants to use a 6 year old box? This brings up another point. Go off and blow $35k on an E450 and it's a performance dog in 2 years max. So then spend another $35k+ for a new one. Or, replace your Linux boxes every 2 years for $5k. Granted price is not everything, but it is something to consider.
#6) No comment. I'm not an IT manager so I don't care how hard it is to install the OS from home.
In summary:
I'm simply saying that for a lot of applications Linux/Intel provides superior performance compared to Sun at a tiny fraction of the price.
In the world that I work in, time is money too. And when you can run synthesis on Linux in 1 hour vs. 3 hours on the E450 at 1/7th the cost, Linux wins. The server farm needs next to no support after it is installed. If one of the servers breaks, who cares? All of the application software and data is stored on a networked drive. Throw away the box and replace it. Or if you really care, repair it.
I think that Sun is in big trouble, even with the high end servers. Just an example at my company: We have an E450 with 2 450MHz CPUs and 4GB RAM. That system easily costs $35000. So we decided to try out some cheap-o Linux desktops: dual Pentium III/1GHz with 2GB RAM. These cost $5000 max (from Dell. You can get them cheaper elsewhere). Anyway, the Linux desktops outperform the E450 by 30-40% on our applications. The problem comes in when you try to use too much RAM -- Linux doesn't seem to be able to handle it very well compared to Sun. But for 95% of the stuff we do (Verilog simulations, HDL synthesis, timing analysis) they are faster and cheaper than the E450. Plus more and more of our applications are becoming available for Linux.
Intel is releasing faster chips all the time and Linux is continually improving -- I don't think it will take long until Sun is left in the dust.
If I recall correctly , the report I read a while back said it is a rare case that it makes sense for a building over 10 stories to be built nowadays.
I consider this to be almost the definitive rare case. OK, it might be more expensive to rebuild them than the original construction ($400M), but I don't think economics have changed so much in the past 30 years to make it completely unreasonable. Rebuilding would also be a powerful message to all terrorists that they can't forever change how we live.
After repeated terrorist attacks, what company would want to move in? Who would want to work in a building that people routinely try to level?
By that same argument, why do people fly in airplanes? Why does anyone live in Israel? Why don't we all flee into the hinterlands and live in straw huts and ride horses? This is precisely what the terrorists want. We should take terrorism seriously and respond with as many countermeasures as possible but shouldn't let it affect our lives.
"Aircraft hijacking has formerly been a hallmark of Middle Eastern terror groups. The advent of what is considered modern international terrorism occurred in July 1968 when members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an Israeli El Al commercial flight en route from Rome to Tel Aviv."
Anyway, I don't see how letting anybody bring weapons onto aircraft at will solves the problem. However, there used to be armed law enforcement officials on airplane flights in the 70s to counteract terrorism. I beleive they were called air marshals. Maybe it's time to bring them back?
Somebody else has already brought up the other shows I was going to talk about (Andromeda, Dr. Who, Red Dwarf)... but where's Blake's 7?
Unfortunately it wasn't particuarly popular, but it did run for 4 seasons on the BBC. I think that the character development was quite good, especially in the first half of the show. The characters were usually out for themselves first and for the group sort-of when it was convienent. Plus no ridiculous pseudo-philosophical problems.
The overall story line was very believable too -- a group of unlikely outlaws rebelling against an tyrannical Federation -- and not any of the silly utopian nonsense you get with ST: The Marxist Generation. And major characters would often die, making it more realistic.
Of course the series did have its downfalls. Towards the end it seemed they ran out of stories and the episodes got pretty silly. Plus they suffered from the typical BBC attention to special effects. On most occaisons you couldn't see the strings on their models..
Slashdot Mirror
No no, the best part of PM was the hidden outtake sequence. (see the 3rd paragraph on that page) Some of them are hilarious. Sadly it only lasts for about 2 minutes.
Yes, you can run a lot of these old programs on the nice new shiny P4 2.4GHz. Just better hope nobody put in a nifty assembly language timer loop counting on the 4.77MHz clock speed... It could really screw things up. And if it's used for any kind of real-time control, this is very likely. If they upgraded to anything other than the original specs it would probably require a lot of validation testing or pouring over the old program to make sure this kind of thing isn't an issue.
Ok, here goes.
#1) Point taken. I'm not attempting to claim that Linux has the same reliability or support compared to Sun/Solaris. I wouldn't recommend putting anything mission-critical on Linux vs. Solaris at this point because of it. However, Linux is progressing very rapidly, and I think that the day is coming where Solaris's advantage evaporates.
#2) Point taken but I really don't see the relevance.
#3) Big deal. After you install your apps on Linux, don't screw with adding all manner of useless garbage. If you keep identical hardware (which is really all that Sun is making you do) and intelligently install new software you will not have this problem.
#4) Who wants to use a 6 year old box? This brings up another point. Go off and blow $35k on an E450 and it's a performance dog in 2 years max. So then spend another $35k+ for a new one. Or, replace your Linux boxes every 2 years for $5k. Granted price is not everything, but it is something to consider.
#6) No comment. I'm not an IT manager so I don't care how hard it is to install the OS from home.
In summary:
I'm simply saying that for a lot of applications Linux/Intel provides superior performance compared to Sun at a tiny fraction of the price.
In the world that I work in, time is money too. And when you can run synthesis on Linux in 1 hour vs. 3 hours on the E450 at 1/7th the cost, Linux wins. The server farm needs next to no support after it is installed. If one of the servers breaks, who cares? All of the application software and data is stored on a networked drive. Throw away the box and replace it. Or if you really care, repair it.
I think that Sun is in big trouble, even with the high end servers. Just an example at my company: We have an E450 with 2 450MHz CPUs and 4GB RAM. That system easily costs $35000. So we decided to try out some cheap-o Linux desktops: dual Pentium III/1GHz with 2GB RAM. These cost $5000 max (from Dell. You can get them cheaper elsewhere). Anyway, the Linux desktops outperform the E450 by 30-40% on our applications. The problem comes in when you try to use too much RAM -- Linux doesn't seem to be able to handle it very well compared to Sun. But for 95% of the stuff we do (Verilog simulations, HDL synthesis, timing analysis) they are faster and cheaper than the E450. Plus more and more of our applications are becoming available for Linux.
Intel is releasing faster chips all the time and Linux is continually improving -- I don't think it will take long until Sun is left in the dust.
I consider this to be almost the definitive rare case. OK, it might be more expensive to rebuild them than the original construction ($400M), but I don't think economics have changed so much in the past 30 years to make it completely unreasonable. Rebuilding would also be a powerful message to all terrorists that they can't forever change how we live.
By that same argument, why do people fly in airplanes? Why does anyone live in Israel? Why don't we all flee into the hinterlands and live in straw huts and ride horses? This is precisely what the terrorists want. We should take terrorism seriously and respond with as many countermeasures as possible but shouldn't let it affect our lives.
Somebody else has already brought up the other shows I was going to talk about (Andromeda, Dr. Who, Red Dwarf)... but where's Blake's 7?
Unfortunately it wasn't particuarly popular, but it did run for 4 seasons on the BBC. I think that the character development was quite good, especially in the first half of the show. The characters were usually out for themselves first and for the group sort-of when it was convienent. Plus no ridiculous pseudo-philosophical problems.
The overall story line was very believable too -- a group of unlikely outlaws rebelling against an tyrannical Federation -- and not any of the silly utopian nonsense you get with ST: The Marxist Generation. And major characters would often die, making it more realistic.
Of course the series did have its downfalls. Towards the end it seemed they ran out of stories and the episodes got pretty silly. Plus they suffered from the typical BBC attention to special effects. On most occaisons you couldn't see the strings on their models..